The Contribution of GMH Elizabeth
Operations to the South Australian economy
and the Potential Impacts of Closure
UPDATED ASSESSMENT 2013
Barry Burgan and John Spoehr
November 2013
THE CONTRIBUTION OF GMH’S ELIZABETH
OPERATIONS TO THE SOUTH AUSTRALIAN
ECONOMY AND POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF
CLOSURE
UPDATED ASSESSMENT 2013
Barry Burgan and John Spoehr
November 2013
The Contribution of GMH’s Elizabeth Operations to the South Australian Economy and
Impacts of Closure – Updated Assessment 2013
WISeR
4
Australian Workplace Innovation and Social Research Centre
The University of Adelaide
230 North Terrace
Adelaide
South Australia 5005
www.adelaide.edu.au/wiser
Published November 2013.
ISBN: 978-0-9873424-9-2
Suggested citation:
Burgan, B & Spoehr, J. 2013. The Contribution of GMH’s Elizabeth Operations to the South Australian Economy
and Potential Impacts of Closure – Updated Assessment 2013. Adelaide: Australian Workplace
Innovation and Social Research Centre, The University of Adelaide.
The Australian Workplace Innovation and Social Research Centre (WISeR) focuses on work and socioeconomic change. WISeR is particularly interested in how organisational structure and practices, technology
and economic systems, policy and institutions, environment and culture interact to influence the performance
of workplaces and the wellbeing of individuals, households and communities.
WISeR also specialises in socio-economic impact assessment including the distributional impacts and human
dimensions of change on different population groups and localities. Our research plays a key role in informing
policy and strategy development at a national, local and international level.
CONTENTS ....................................................................................................................................................... 5
KEY FINDINGS AT A GLANCE ............................................................................................................................ 3
1
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................ 5
2
IDENTIFYING THE SUPPLY CHAIN LINKAGES ............................................................................................. 5
3
MODELLING THE CONTRIBUTION FROM A WHOLE OF ECONOMY PERSPECTIVE ...................................... 6
3.1
3.2
4
THE 2011 CONTRIBUTION............................................................................................................................. 6
THE 2013 PICTURE ...................................................................................................................................... 8
THE IMPACT OF THE CLOSURE OF GMH’S OPERATIONS IN 2013............................................................. 10
4.1
4.2
4.3
BASE CASE SCENARIO ................................................................................................................................. 12
ADJUSTING FOR FREED RESOURCES ............................................................................................................... 12
ADDITIONAL LOST VALUE ............................................................................................................................ 13
L IST OF F IGURES
FIGURE 1: EFFECTS ON REGIONAL EMPLOYMENT OF RAPID ELIMINATION OF MPV ASSISTANCE AND GENERAL TARIFFS - MONASH
MODEL PROJECTIONS .......................................................................................................................................... 11
L IST OF T ABLES
TABLE 1: SUPPLY CHAIN (INPUT OR PRODUCTION FUNCTION) STRUCTURES FOR SA MANUFACTURING INPUTS BY INDUSTRY SECTOR
($ MILLION) ........................................................................................................................................................ 6
TABLE 2: ESTIMATED LOCAL EXPENDITURE ASSOCIATED WITH GMH’S SA OPERATIONS - 2011 ................................................. 7
TABLE 3: ESTIMATES OF ECONOMIC ACTIVITY ASSOCIATED WITH GMH’S SA OPERATIONS - 2011 ............................................. 8
TABLE 4: ESTIMATED LOCAL EXPENDITURE ASSOCIATED WITH GMH’S SA OPERATIONS - 2013 ................................................. 9
TABLE 5: ESTIMATES OF ECONOMIC ACTIVITY ASSOCIATED WITH GMH’S SA OPERATIONS - 2013 ........................................... 10
TABLE 6: ESTIMATED LOST EXPENDITURE DUE TO CLOSURE OF GMH’S SA OPERATIONS – ALTERNATIVE SCENARIO 1: RESOURCES
DIVERTED TO OTHER SECTORS.............................................................................................................................. 12
TABLE 7: ESTIMATED ECONOMIC IMPACT OF CLOSURE OF GMH’S SA OPERATIONS AS AT 2013 ALTERNATIVE SCENARIO 1:
RESOURCES DIVERTED TO OTHER SECTORS ............................................................................................................. 13
TABLE 8: ESTIMATED LOCAL EXPENDITURE ASSOCIATED WITH GMH’S SA OPERATIONS AS AT 2013 ALTERNATIVE SCENARIO 2:
ADDITIONAL LOST VALUE .................................................................................................................................... 14
TABLE 9: ESTIMATED ECONOMIC IMPACT OF GMH’S SA OPERATIONS AS AT 2013 ALTERNATIVE SCENARIO 2: ADDITIONAL LOST
VALUE ............................................................................................................................................................. 15
K EY F INDINGS AT A GLANCE
This paper presents the results of an analysis of the contribution that the GMH manufacturing facility in
Elizabeth makes to South Australia. It updates a previous analysis of the contribution in 2011 undertaken
for the Department of Manufacturing, Innovation, Trade, Resources and Energy – to reflect the reduction
in employment at the facility that has occurred over the last two years. The summary conclusion is that:

In 2011, GMH was reported as directly employing 2,700 people and purchasing $530 million of
supplies from core suppliers. In 2013 that has reduced to an estimated 1,750 jobs while still a similar
level of supplies from core suppliers.

Due to supply chain effects, the direct and first round (i.e. GMH and its direct suppliers) of GMHs
activities are estimated to:

o
in 2011 – involve total expenditure of $930 million, contributing $520 million to Gross State
Product and supporting 5,610 jobs.
o
in 2013 – involve total expenditure of $750 million, contributing $400 million to Gross State
Product and supporting 4,340 jobs.
If the full flow through effects of this activity are considered (including the impact of the purchases of
suppliers, and the spend of wages and salary income) the total economic activity linked to GMHs
operations are estimated as:
o
In 2011 a $1.1 billion contribution to GSP (or 1.3% of Gross State Product), 11,700 jobs (1.5%
of employment), $65 million per year of the state taxation base ($31.5 million in payroll tax
and $33.2 million in other taxation revenue.
o
In 2013 a $0.9 billion contribution to GSP, 9,500 jobs, $53 million per year of the state
taxation base ($31.5 million in payroll tax and $33.2 million in other taxation revenue.
If GMH was to cease manufacturing operations in South Australia, the above estimates provide an
indication of what level of activity is at risk. A number of potential mediating factors need to be
considered:

GMHs closure would free up resources currently employed in the economy and make them available
for other activity (there would be a deflationary effect on real wages and property prices that would
increase the competitiveness of other sectors of the economy to facilitate this outcome). It is
indicatively estimated that allowing for this effect, the impact on the state economy of GMH closing
would be offset by growth in other sectors, and that total economic activity lost in the state linked to
GMH’s closure would be of the order of $0.35 billion of GSP, 4,300 jobs of employment and $22
million per year to the state taxation base.

On the other hand, GMHs closure would make some major suppliers uneconomic, and not only might
the state lose the supply chain that services GMH in Playford, but also the other activity that these
businesses undertake (supplying into other sectors or states). It is indicatively estimated that allowing
for this effect (independently of the issue of freed resources), the total economic activity lost in the
state linked to GMH’s closure would be of the order of $1.24 billion of GSP, 13,200 jobs and $72
million per year to the state taxation base.
Note that this report does not consider the issues around what is required to underpin the longer term
sustainability of the operations at GMH. Nor does it consider the benefits that would arise from
alternative uses of the funds that have and might be applied to GMH support.
WISeR
3
The Contribution of GMH’s Elizabeth Operations to the South Australian Economy and
Impacts of Closure – Updated Assessment 2013
1 I NTRODUCTION
This report presents an updated assessment of the economic, financial and workforce
implications of GMH closing operations in Elizabeth in South Australia. Outside the scope
of this report is any assessment of the effectiveness of support (policy and/or financial) to
keep the operations open. Nor does the analysis consider the level of benefits that would
be achieved by use of the funds provided to support for other economic purposes, or
through reduction in underlying taxes.
2 I DENTIFYING THE S UPPLY C HAIN L INKAGES
In 2011, it was reported that there were approximately 2,700 employees (direct
employees and sub-contractors) based at GMH’s Elizabeth facility. Linked to these
employees there was a payroll for the period of (July 2010 to June 2011) of wages of
$133.06 million, and salaries of $36.11 million.
Information provided by GMH indicates the core supplier base (supporting the Elizabeth
facility) of parts and components in the manufacturing process is as follows:



$528 million per annum supplied by 29 suppliers based in South Australia
$197 million per annum supplied by 70 suppliers based in Victoria
$11.5 million per annum supplies by 16 suppliers based in New South Wales
The supplier base is made up of different types of operations, and can be classified into
Tier 1 (where GMH and/or automotive in general are the core business of suppliers)
through to Tier 2, 3 and 4 – where GMH and automotive clients comprise smaller
proportions of the output. Some of the larger employers in the Tier 1 category include
businesses such as TA (Australia) Group (Monroe Australia and Walker) with 690
employees, Toyoda Gosei (297 employees), SMR Automotive (450 employees), Futuris
Automotive Group (320 employees). Tier 2 and 3 businesses include Intercast and Forge
(250 employees), Excide (230 employees), Alloy Technologies etc.
In addition the car assembly supplier Base in SA also supports Toyota in Victoria – with an
estimated spend by Toyota to South Australian companies of $200 -$270 million per year.
Since that period, employment at GMH has fallen to 1,750 employees, in two steps. This
has been linked to improved labour productivity outcomes, and is not a consequence of
declines in production. At this point the information provided suggests supply chains
have not been impacted.
Table 1 indicates the underlying supply chain structures for the Automotive
manufacturing sector (as defined in ANZIC code and in the latest state Input Output
tables). The ABS categorisation of Motor Vehicle and Parts and other Transport
Equipment represents 17% of the value of activity in manufacturing sector excluding food
and beverage. It is underpinned by activity in the trade sector, in property and business
services, as well as general manufacturing.
WISeR
5
The Contribution of GMH’s Elizabeth Operations to the South Australian Economy and
Impacts of Closure – Updated Assessment 2013
T ABLE 1: S UPPLY C HAIN (I NPUT OR P RODUCTION F UNCTION ) S TRUCTURES
I NPUTS BY I NDUSTRY S ECTOR ($ MILLION )
FOR
SA M ANUFACTURING
Motor vehicles
& parts; other
transport
equip
Total
Manufacturing
– excl. Food
Total
Manufacturing
0
87
1,404
Automotive Manufacturing
204
253
258
Other Manufacturing
342
3,393
3,890
Utilities, Construction
16
96
133
Trade (wholesale and Retail)
474
1,276
1,618
Transport and Storage
59
709
1,075
Property and Business Services
287
1,290
1,610
Other
113
1,217
2,047
1,496
8,322
12,035
Household income
601
4,845
6,091
Gross Operating Surplus
228
1,365
2,182
Taxes less subsidies on production
64
381
542
Imports
975
5,235
6,369
Total Production
3,364
20,148
27,218
Employment (fte)
14,803
82,856
104,456
Employment (no. jobs)
13,855
79,241
101,167
Agriculture
Total Intermediate Expenditure
Source: SA Input Output tables for 2007, as contained in EconSearch Pty Ltd, “Economic and
Environmental Indicators for South Australia and its Regions, 2006/07”, Prepared for Department
of Trade and Economic Development, 23 March 2009
3 M ODELLING THE C ONTRIBUTION FROM A W HOLE OF E CONOMY
P ERSPECTIVE
3.1 T HE 2011 C ONTRIBUTION
The first step in the analysis utilised in this paper is to use the above information, and an
input-output framework to assess the 2011 contribution of GMH’s operation from a
whole of economy context. An input output framework is consistent with national
accounting principles and provides the forward and backward linkages of individual
industry sectors. By identifying the expenditures associated with GMH’s activity,
allocating them to the relevant industry sector and then tracing the linkages though an
input-output table, the total network of contributions can be identified.
The supplier base above is the specific input suppliers, and based on the proportion of
inputs for the automotive sector as a whole (Table 1) it is further assumed that 30% of
these suppliers are specific automotive manufacturers, while 70% are in other categories
of manufacturing (e.g. plastics, general metal fabrication etc.).
WISeR
6
The Contribution of GMH’s Elizabeth Operations to the South Australian Economy and
Impacts of Closure – Updated Assessment 2013
In addition to that there is the general operating spend to be included that supports
GMH’s activity - including business services, IT services and communication, electricity
etc. Values have been estimated for these expenditures by applying the ratios to spend
to employment in the IO tables for the motor vehicle sector.
The above represents the operating spend of GMH, and in addition the investment spend
will be incorporated in building and equipment care, refitting, and reinvestment. This will
be somewhat cyclical in nature. National accounts indicates that fixed capital
accumulation represent around 13% of turnover across the economy as a whole, and so
in this analysis it is conservatively assumed that there is an annualised value of
investment at 10% of the operating value. This has been distributed across industry
sectors as in Table 2 below, with the balance of the spend not allocated assumed to be on
direct imports.
Table 2 therefore shows the estimated expenditure linked to GMH’s activity by sector of
expenditure based on these above assumptions.
T ABLE 2: E STIMATED L OCAL E XPENDITURE A SSOCIATED WITH GMH’ S SA O PERATIONS - 2011
Source: Modelled result
Table 3 shows the modeled estimates of the level of economic activity that is associated
with operations at GMH. The results are presented at three levels (note that these are not
additive - each level includes the preceding level). The first is the level of activity that
occurs at GMH itself, and within the direct suppliers to GMH (parts and general business
services). The second (All Production Induced Impacts) is the implications of this traced
through all the industry oriented supply chains at work. The third (Total Impact) is
inclusive of the consumption spend impacts – the spend of GMH’s workers on general
consumption, and the flow-through effects of wages paid in suppliers etc.
WISeR
7
The Contribution of GMH’s Elizabeth Operations to the South Australian Economy and
Impacts of Closure – Updated Assessment 2013
T ABLE 3: E STIMATES OF E CONOMIC A CTIVITY A SSOCIATED WITH GMH’ S SA O PERATIONS - 2011
Source: Modelled result
The modeling suggests that the operations of GMH in 2011:




Supported directly 5,600 jobs and underpinned $520 million of value added at
GMH and its first round suppliers.
Supported, through production induced impacts, a total of almost 8,000 jobs
and contributes $0.76 billion to Gross State Product.
When including all impacts (i.e. including the consumption induced impacts),
supported through production induced impacts a total of 11,700 jobs (FTE’s)
and contributes $1.11 billion to Gross State Product. This represented of the
order of 1.3% of total Gross State Product, and 1.4% of employment in the
State.
Given that wages and salary income is taxed for employers who pay wages
above the threshold level at 4.95% in terms of payroll tax, it is assumed that the
majority of the wages impact above is in larger firms on the full tax rate, with a
10% discount applied to allow for a small number of firms which would not be.
Other state taxes (property taxes, gambling, and motor vehicle) on average
represent around 3.0% of GDP. On this basis it is estimated that linked to the
total activity above state taxes represent around $65 million ($31.5 million of
payroll tax and $33.4 million of other taxes). Almost half ($31 million) is linked
to the outcomes directly in GMH and its suppliers, while the balance is linked to
the flow through effects.
3.2 T HE 2013 P ICTURE
Since 2011 GMH has taken steps to improve competitiveness by reducing labour inputs
and changing conditions and employment arrangements. As a consequence the wages
component (and direct employment) has fallen. The major supply chain inputs are
assumed to remain constant (based on information provided) while other inputs are
assumed to be proportional to wages, and so generally fall. Table 4 indicates the
estimated current local spend assuming that it is wages only that has been significantly
reduced.
WISeR
8
The Contribution of GMH’s Elizabeth Operations to the South Australian Economy and
Impacts of Closure – Updated Assessment 2013
T ABLE 4: E STIMATED L OCAL E XPENDITURE A SSOCIATED WITH GMH’ S SA O PERATIONS - 2013
Source: Modelled result
Table 5 shows the modeled estimates of the level of economic activity that is associated
with the operations at GMH as at 2013. The results are presented at three levels (note
that these are not additive, each level includes the preceding level). The first is the level
of activity that occurs at GMH itself, and within the direct suppliers to GMH (parts and
general business services). The second (all production induced impacts) is the implications
of this traced through all the industry oriented supply chains at work. The third (total
impact) is the previous impacts, but also inclusive of the consumption spend impacts –
the spend of GMH’s workers on general consumption, and the flow-through effects of
wages paid in suppliers etc.
WISeR
9
The Contribution of GMH’s Elizabeth Operations to the South Australian Economy and
Impacts of Closure – Updated Assessment 2013
T ABLE 5: E STIMATES OF E CONOMIC A CTIVITY A SSOCIATED WITH GMH’ S SA O PERATIONS - 2013
Source: Modelled result
The modeling suggests that in 2013 the GMH operation has the following economic,
employment and financial impacts in South Australia:




Directly 4,300 jobs and underpins $400 million of value added at GMH and its
first round suppliers (a reduction of 1,200 jobs over 2011)
Supports through production induced impacts a total of almost 6,500 jobs and
contributes $0.62 billion to Gross State Product
When including all impacts (i.e. including the consumption induced impacts),
supports a total of 9,500 jobs (FTEs) and contributes $0.91 billion to Gross State
Product.
Linked to the total activity above, annual state taxes paid based on this activity,
exclusive of GST revenue is around $53 million ($25.6 million of payroll tax and
$27.2 million of other taxes). Almost half ($24 million) is linked to the
outcomes directly in GMH and its suppliers, while the balance is linked to the
flow through effects.
4 T HE I MPACT OF THE C LOSURE OF GMH’ S O PERATIONS IN 2013
In this section of the report we examine what the likely impact would be of General
Motors ceasing manufacturing operations at its Elizabeth plant (and in Australia). The
contribution above represents an estimate of the level of activity that would be at risk if
this were to occur at the current time. The above analysis indicates that the impact is
potentially very significant, representing 1.5% of state employment in the entire supply
chain in 2011 – noting that this has now reduced as a consequence of new employment
arrangements in 2013.
WISeR
10
The Contribution of GMH’s Elizabeth Operations to the South Australian Economy and
Impacts of Closure – Updated Assessment 2013
It is necessary to recognise that there are a range of possible economic responses to an
economic shock of this nature. The implications of reduced activity in the Motor Vehicle
sector has been modeled and considered over the years, particularly by the Productivity
Commission in the context of their Inquiries into tariff policy. The Review of Automotive
Assistance Inquiry report in 2002 concluded that the rapid elimination of passenger motor
vehicle assistance and general tariffs in Australian motor vehicles would result in:



a forecast 7.0% decline in output (relative to the base case) from the national
motor vehicle and parts industry
a short term 0.07% decline in national aggregate employment, and a 0.06%
decline in GDP – but this impact would be mitigated over time as employment
opportunities were redirected to other sectors
a short term 2% decline in employment in South Australia (note this was prior
to the Mitsubishi closure) but this would reduce a little to be a 1.3% decline
after 10 years (again relative to the base case).
This modeling indicates that at the national level the reduction in activity in the motor
vehicle industry that would result from tariff changes would cause a small short term
impact at the national level but minimal impact in the longer run as the resources
previously allocated to the inefficient motor vehicle sector would be redirected to other
sectors of the economy (often more efficient). It should be noted that this modeling
generally assumes that there is costless transferability of skills from one industry to
another. However the modeling also clearly concludes that it is states other than South
Australia that will benefit from reductions in assistance to the sector – jobs will be
created in mining in WA and Queensland, and international tourism at the prevalent
locations. Therefore South Australia would be faced with some significant restructuring
costs in this context. The outcomes are depicted in the report as follows:
F IGURE 1: E FFECTS ON REGIONAL EMPLOYMENT
GENERAL TARIFFS - M ONASH MODEL PROJECTIONS
OF RAPID ELIMINATION OF
MPV
ASSISTANCE AND
Source: Review of Automotive Assistance, Productivity Commission Inquiry Report No 25, 30
August 2002
WISeR
11
The Contribution of GMH’s Elizabeth Operations to the South Australian Economy and
Impacts of Closure – Updated Assessment 2013
4.1 B ASE C ASE S CENARIO
The simplest interpretation of the impact of closure of GMH as it currently operates
would be that the direct and supporting activity as estimated in Tables 4 and 5 would be
lost to the state – i.e. there would be a reduction of $0.9 billion of GSP or 9,500 jobs.
But the actual outcome would depend – as noted – on how the economy reacts, and as
such alternative scenarios have been modeled as follows.
4.2 A DJUSTING
FOR
F REED R ESOURCES
In considering the implications of GMH closing one possibility is that resources will
effectively be diverted to other uses, and that the total impact will be less than the supply
chain linkages as modeled above. Modeling using a Computable General Equilibrium
model (as per the Monash model used in Productivity Commission reports) would include
relationships where the decline in demand for resources associated with GMH closing
would result in prices falling (real wages, property prices) and as such there would be
increasing employment in other sectors. The Monash modeling, however, confirms that
to the extent that this exists, much of this opportunity will be in other states.
It would be possible to model this using the Monash model or an equivalent, but this is
out of scope and timing for this analysis. Therefore for this scenario it has been
indicatively assumed that 50% of the lost output from GMH could be picked up across
other industry sectors of the South Australian economy and this offsets the damage of
the loss of GMH. The results of this modeling are shown in Table 6 and Table 7.
Reductions in output in automotive and other manufacturing are offset by gains in other
industry sectors.
T ABLE 6: E STIMATED L OST E XPENDITURE DUE TO C LOSURE
S CENARIO 1: R ESOURCES D IVERTED TO O THER S ECTORS
OF
GMH’ S SA O PERATIONS – A LTERNATIVE
Source: Modelled result
WISeR
12
The Contribution of GMH’s Elizabeth Operations to the South Australian Economy and
Impacts of Closure – Updated Assessment 2013
T ABLE 7: E STIMATED E CONOMIC I MPACT OF C LOSURE OF GMH’ S SA O PERATIONS
A LTERNATIVE S CENARIO 1: R ESOURCES D IVERTED TO O THER S ECTORS
AS AT
2013
Source: Modelled result
The modeling for this scenario suggests the following impacts from the closure of GMH:


When including all impacts (i.e. including the consumption induced impacts),
there would be a loss of 4,300 jobs (FTE’s) and $0.35 billion of Gross State
Product. This represents of the order of 0.4% of total Gross State Product, and
0.5% of employment in the State
State taxes would be reduced by around $22 million annually ($12 million of
payroll tax and $10 million of other taxes).
It is noted that this scenario assumes that resources can be easily diverted to other
activities. Some would argue, for example, that closure would make labour and other
resources more freely available to the mining industry to the benefit of that sector.
However, it is noted that mining is capital rather than labour intensive, employing far
fewer people than the automotive sector does in South Australia. As a consequence the
closure of GMH would incur significant adjustment costs, particularly given the sustained
decline in manufacturing employment since the GFC, which severely constrains the range
of opportunities available to those who lose jobs as a result of closure. Even during
relatively buoyant economic times, such as that prevailing at the time of the Mitsubishi
closure, alternative employment at a similar level can be difficult to secure. Significant
investment in retraining, family and personal support, income support and economic
development initiatives will be required to offset a shock of the magnitude of the closure
of GMH. Wider losses also need to be taken into account including depopulation.
4.3 A DDITIONAL L OST V ALUE
The modeling above assumes that there are constant returns to scale, and that the
implications are linked only to the value of transactions associated with GMH’s business.
It must be recognised that this can understate the impact, as the impact of the loss of
sales on suppliers to GMH can have a tipping point effect, resulting in the closure of
businesses that are heavily, but not solely, reliant on GMH. A cumulative effect is also
WISeR
13
The Contribution of GMH’s Elizabeth Operations to the South Australian Economy and
Impacts of Closure – Updated Assessment 2013
possible resulting in the collapse of key elements of the automotive supply chain,
particularly those producing for Toyota (estimated to be around $200-270 million per
annum in value to SA suppliers).
To model this effect it is assumed that GMH’s activity represents 50% of automotive
manufacturing suppliers, and that all of this would be lost. A review of the characteristics
of the Tier 1 suppliers supports that GMH is indeed the dominant customer for many of
these businesses, and for others without GMH, they would have no reason to be located
in South Australia – as South Australian customers are a very small proportion of their
activity. Indeed in many cases they have located in South Australia due to the existence
of GMH, but in addition would lose the Toyota work. It is assumed that GMH’s activity
represents 50% of the work of the other manufacturing suppliers, and conservatively that
50% of the other activity is also lost. While some businesses may develop replacement
customers, others will not be able to survive the loss of GMH as a lead customer.
The results of this modeling are shown in Table 8 and Table 9.
T ABLE 8: E STIMATED L OCAL E XPENDITURE A SSOCIATED WITH GMH’ S SA O PERATIONS AS AT 2013
A LTERNATIVE S CENARIO 2: A DDITIONAL L OST V ALUE
Source: Modelled result
WISeR
14
The Contribution of GMH’s Elizabeth Operations to the South Australian Economy and
Impacts of Closure – Updated Assessment 2013
T ABLE 9: E STIMATED E CONOMIC I MPACT OF GMH’ S SA O PERATIONS AS AT 2013 A LTERNATIVE
S CENARIO 2: A DDITIONAL L OST V ALUE
Source: Modelled result
The modeling for this scenario suggests the following impact associated with the closure
of the operations of GMH:


WISeR
When including all impacts (i.e. including the consumption induced impacts),
there would be a loss of 13,176 jobs (FTE’s) and $1.24 billion of Gross State
Product.
State taxes would be reduced by around $72 million annually ($35 million of
payroll tax and $37 million of other taxes).
15
The Contribution of GMH’s Elizabeth Operations to the South Australian Economy and
Impacts of Closure – Updated Assessment 2013
WISeR
16